i am still available
Account Details | |
---|---|
SteamID64 | 76561198061701443 |
SteamID3 | [U:1:101435715] |
SteamID32 | STEAM_0:1:50717857 |
Country | Canada |
Signed Up | February 12, 2017 |
Last Posted | April 17, 2024 at 12:55 AM |
Posts | 159 (0.1 per day) |
Game Settings | |
---|---|
In-game Sensitivity | |
Windows Sensitivity | |
Raw Input | |
DPI |
|
Resolution |
|
Refresh Rate |
Hardware Peripherals | |
---|---|
Mouse | |
Keyboard | |
Mousepad | |
Headphones | |
Monitor |
why not lfp
the kronge realm name must be maintained
also they frag
they don't call him mr. winrate for nothing
IM capable, particularly on scout
theyre good maps, happy to see something come of them
cool dude and easily IM imo
Unity is an aggressive medic tho, so he would do best on an aggressive team. Put him on a passive team and you might find him over-extending. but really, super underrated dude
good high level pugs and a lot of the test maps are getting really close to finished which makes them really fun to play
ZestyI think a really cool project would be to take these demos (or if you wanted a smaller but perhaps more useful dataset you could use only invite/prem stvs) and produce a heatmap of player location density. (Each tick from each demo would effectively give you 12 datapoints for this, so you get a pretty big dataset). I imagine maps that are famous for stalemating will have concentrated high density regions (e.g. badlands in lobby and at last). I think this would be more beneficial than heatmaps of deaths which is something valve has already done e.g. with dustbowl.
A thousand times this. A heatmap which shows where players hold most in stalemates would be a great way to look at both map balance and skill level (maps which have overcentralizing points on the heatmap/better players holding in different positions more). You would have to control for logs which are a constant roll back and forth--but any match that goes the full 30 minutes is probably stalematey enough to be reliable.
With all the maptesting going on recently, this would be an asset. Being able to physically see where a map overcentralizes its defensible positions would make balancing and producing competitive maps way WAY easier than the "how does this make you feel" playtesting we have at the moment.
like i dont even know dude
you should be banning maps based on whether or not you're better than the other team at it. you say that you only play process because it's a map your team is good at, yet i can guarantee your team is worse at process than half the teams in IM this season; so it'd be to your benefit to ban process against those teams in favour of less played maps where you might be able to get an edge.
like, choosing not to ban to most popular maps against teams you are heavily unfavoured against is probably the most retarded thing you could do, unless your goal is to lose quickly. They will have way more experience on those maps than your team, so you'll be at a massive disadvantage. At least on new maps, you don't need to factor in years of practice. Literally just a couple weeks of scrims on propaganda would give you more experience on that map than most teams in IM right now. You said it yourself, practically nobody is scrimming propaganda--that's a huge opportunity.
choosing to play a map because you're "good" at it, even if you're a shitton worse than the other team at it, is probably the most coddled and comfortable thing you could do. If the odds are against you, you should take risks, and pick/bans give you the ability to take those risks.
like what the fuck
ofc im happy IM is living, and yea the irony's not lost on me
our open team is an off-class no scrim friend team and nobody wanted to pay to play IM. none of us were going to play this season at all, but figured we could have some fun just dicking around in open. but yea its a bad look ik